Democrats – giving “your papers please” a new twist

Sometimes I just love the Democrats. After fomenting a near meltdown over the Arizona immigration law, with charges of nazism and cries of “show me you papers!” flying hither and yon, the Democrats introduce an immigration framework with what?

Improved papers, of course.

Yes, the Dems screwed the pooch and included a national ID card in their proposed legislation. And a biometric one at that. As someone characterized it, it’s a “super Social Security card”. Remember when you were assured that your SS card/number was not for identification purposes and never would be. Well Bunky, that was as true as most of the promises politicians make.

Democratic leaders have proposed requiring every worker in the nation to carry a national identification card with biometric information, such as a fingerprint, within the next six years, according to a draft of the measure.

Heh … how do Democrats kill the momentum working in their favor in an issue which might actually help them in November?

Totally misunderstand the point.

For once, I’m in complete agreement with the ACLU who wasted no time in savaging the plan:

“Creating a biometric national ID will not only be astronomically expensive, it will usher government into the very center of our lives. Every worker in America will need a government permission slip in order to work. And all of this will come with a new federal bureaucracy — one that combines the worst elements of the DMV and the TSA,” said Christopher Calabrese, ACLU legislative counsel.

24 Responses to Democrats – giving “your papers please” a new twist

Is this worse than what we have now with the SSI numbers, and little ability to link to the actual person? We live in a world where verification of ones identity is paramount to social function, how do we accomplish that?

I agree. VA and No. Carolina have both had recent controversies when it was found that their DMV’s were not taking any pains to verify the identity of people who were getting drivers licenses. The reason is that the government thought it racist / discriminatory to take such a draconian step.

I don’t care about tracking of anybody. But there should be a way, with a minimum of effort to positively identify a person. You could argue that this is done at a state level, but since most business is conducted at a national or international level, this is a poor way at best. The federal government did cause the problem by providing unique identifiers (SSI numbers) but fail to provide a accurate way of verification of authenticity. In short, the federal government has already provided an ID card, they have just provided a poor one. I suppose they could have couched this proposal in putting your picture on a SSI card, but that would make to much sense.

Immigrants would be tracked by the federal government (that’s their job). States take care of citizens. Our problem is the federal government hasn’t been doing its job. I see no reason then, to change what states do (and seem satisfied with) because the fed isn’t doing what it should do.

How does this and the introduction of an immigration bill in the Senate square with Obama’s statement yesterday that immigration is off the legislative table for this year. It sounds as if these guys are completely out of control. Oh wait…never mind.

A listener of Rush reminded Rush and the audience that these howling Dems had no problem asking for identification from participants at last summer’s town hall meetings. It is OK to make sure someone can vote in your district, but who cares if they are legal residents.

It isn’t clear to me the Donkey Party had any momentum on their side on this issue. Sure, the Mexicans are upset, but 70% in AZ and 60% nationwide poll in favor of the AZ bill. The MSM can try to change that with biased coverage, but does anyone still listen to them?

I’ve always looked at the dawn of the National ID card as the sunset of the “American Frontier,” that place where a person could get “lost” and start anew.
Sure it’s a romantic notion, but it does have legs

I really don’t think Durbin et al thought about losing the ability to rig elections when the excuse that an ID required to vote is only regressive and racist when there is limited access to getting a “proper ID.”
When everybody is required to have an ID card, it will only be a matter of when it will be required, not if.

You can move somewhere else and “start anew” anytime you want. But if you actually want to change your identity, then I have to ask why? are you a deadbeat with lots of debts, or have you commited crimes? I see no legitimate reason for that unless you are in a witness protection program.
All the hullabaloo about a national ID sounds bad, especially to libertarians. But the truth is, as noted above, we already have it, only ours does not work very well. It can be used to defraud us too easily.